Good Morning. I'm back from work for a few days.
I appologize for not responding earlier, but I've never had a sufficient time block to give a decent response. I could look in for a few minutes, but not for very long.
Why would your cut off level be the safety of driving to work? They are entirely unrelated risks and behaviors.
I know very few ways to avoid having to drive to work, I know a very direct way not to get electrocuted or burned on the job.
Okay, here's why and how -
I'm going to generalize your statement a bit. It should be okay, but if not, I'll change my statement. So, paraphrased, 'you know excellent work methods and techniques to minimize the risk of getting burrned or electrocuted on the job.'
Yes, I agree, You absolutely do. Most all of you posts show that you are experienced, smart, and consciencous. But,
in my opinion, there are no zero risk tasks. There is always some risk. However, the risks can be mittigated - generally to as low as to company management is willing to pay for.
Now let's look at driving to work. I don't know any way to avoid driving to work either. But there are a lot of ways to mittigate the risk: For example, roll bar, reinforcing cage, 4-point harness, helmut, nomex suit, side and forward airbags, fuel cell, automatic internal fire suppression. Just curious, how many of those do you have in your vehicle? Except for forward airbags, I don't have any. Why not? Because,
in my opinion the amount of money it would cost does not justify the reduction in risk. That means I am willing to accept the risk inherent in driving to work in a standard vehicle. Apparently you also accept the risk of driving to work - and probably a lot more risk than I am willing to accept.
Next, if we look at accident statistics, driving one's car to work is likely the most risky thing we will do each day - and that includes our work tasks (statisticly speaking).
So, how do I make the connection between the risk of injury driving to work and acceptable risk at work? Well, most people can see and understand the risks inherent is driving to work. DOT accident statistics are available, and the severity is crippling injury or death. Generally people can see and understand the costs inherent in mittigation measures. And this is a hook into the concepts of risk mittigation.
...You seem to be looking for a written list that says 'this is OK, this is not OK' I know of no such list and I have been interested in seeing something like that since about 1997. I have been on electrical forums since 2002 and have not seen anyone produce such a list. ...
No, not a list - rather a quantification of
likelyhood and severity for each action of the work task. There are methods available to do this quantification. Apparently they are typically not discussed on electrical forums. And since this is not my area of expertise, I can't comment further.
Still, the concepts for quantification and mittigation of risk are the same whether it is driving to work, or a work task. I think the parallel works. And I think the issues are all about the money.
Now, if you don't agree, let's take this to the extreme - say, live-line, bare-handed work. Now that is all about the money it costs to take down a transmission line - no more, no less. (How did you phrase that? Oh yeah, "Yeah, I know it sucks.")
Bear in mind that part of my job is to give company management technical interpretations of regulations. So, when I get asked if XYZ process meets the Osha exception for continuous process, my response is, "I don't know. The regulation is not explicit. All processes can be taken down. It is just a matter of money. You have to tell me if the costs involved are high enough to justify the risk. That is not a decision I can make."
...It is a judgment call that when made had better jive with the AHJs judgement. ...
...That is why in my personal opinion we have to approach it like we are trying to justify it after a death has happened. ...
This is where I would not agree.
In my personal opinion, we have to approach it such that the risks are mittigated to where if the job goes completely wrong, the severity is not death nor crippling injury.
There is risk in anything we do. I would just like to see the part we do for money not result in being unable to continue to work.
So believeth the worm
